Cultural innovation in a cosmopolitan society: Egypt in the Roman world
VIDI research program, Dr. M.J. Versluys, Leiden University, Faculty of Archaeology
Key objective: Where Greek influences on Roman cultural innovation have always been
dominant and well studied, the picture is not balanced and complete without an
integrated understanding of the second important influence by Egypt. An integrated
synthesis based on analyses of different forms of appropriation of Egypt in different
contexts and in different sources will deepen our knowledge on the Roman motives for
the selection and use of ‘foreign’ elements.
The Romans were well aware of the cultural dimensions of innovation and in the end their
tradition looked like a blend of heterogeneous elements. In the study of this process
Greek influences have always been central. Instead, my novel research aims at a better
understanding of Roman cultural innovation by focussing on the role of Egypt. My
challenge is to provide the next step in our understanding of Egypt in the Roman world
by means of an integrated synthesis.
I will use a multi-disciplinary research strategy that puts the process of Roman cultural
innovation central. For the first time in this field, I will combine archaeological,
archaeometric, historical and written sources, methods and analyses.
Through this original research strategy I will be able to provide a novel synthesis
regarding Egyptian influences on the Roman world. This synthesis concerning the role
and meaning of Egypt will subsequently be compared to the role other ‘foreign’ cultures
(Etruscan, Greek, Celtic, Syrian, Jewish etc.) played in the process of Roman
appropriation. By this comparative perspective I will be able to throw a new light on the
functioning of cultural innovation in the Roman Mediterranean and to add to more
general discussions on the cultural aspects of globalisation.
Introduction: Cultural innovation in a cosmopolitan society
Rome conquered the Mediterranean and as a result its (material) culture in the end
looked like a blend of Egyptian, Greek, Etruscan, Italic, and ‘Oriental’ elements and styles
(Gruen 2005; Porter 2006).
The study of this process of cultural innovation and the tensions it generated in the
ancient Mediterranean can be described as unbalanced. In the first part of the 20th
century there mainly was (one-sided) attention for the ‘imperialistic’ Roman centre. This
perspective changed to a focus on the ‘native’ periphery that showed that cultural
influences in the Roman provinces were going in both directions and that often the
provinces were not so Roman as previously thought (for an overview of the
‘Romanisation’ debate see Woolf 1998; MacMullan 2000; Hingley 2005).
Only recently was another step taken towards a better understanding of the unification of
the Mediterranean under Roman rule taken. Scholars then studied the ‘impact of Empire’
on the Roman centre itself, asking how all these foreign influences changed Rome and
Roman cultural identity (Ball 2000; Rajak 2002; Edwards/Woolf 2003). Greek influences,
however, pervasive in all domains of Roman life, got almost exclusive attention
(fundamental in archaeological respect are the studies by T. Hölscher, see, summarising,
Hölscher 1987; 2006; also Wallace-Hadrill 1998; 2008).
But if we want to take Roman pluralism seriously we need to study a much broader
spectrum. This project focuses on Egypt to study Roman cultural innovation because:
1. Studying a different major influence is necessary to broaden and counter balance
the Graeco-centred debate on Roman cultural pluralism.
2. Egyptian influences have been prominent in all of Roman society; after the Greek
influence no other ‘foreign’ culture and style was more dominant.
3. A lot of scholarly work on particular aspects has already been done. Research on
well chosen lacunae that still remain and the application of an integrated and
multi-disciplinary approach can thus lead to a novel synthesis.
Egypt in the Roman world: Shifting paradigms
The meaning, provenance and dating of the many Egyptian style artefacts (Aegyptiaca)
that have been preserved from the Roman world is heavily contested. Egyptian style
material culture from the Roman world is most often divided in two categories: Egyptian
(coming from the Nile valley, sometimes already centuries old and ‘authentic’) and
Egyptianising (made outside Egypt after the Egyptian style and ‘less authentic’) (Malaise
1972; Roullet 1972). As a consequence stylistic, art-historical judgments are often used
to determine the use of Aegyptiaca. ‘Authentic’, Egyptian material would largely have
been religious; while ‘less authentic’, egyptianising material could also have had other
associations and have been used, for instance, to create an exotic atmosphere (Quack
2003; Malaise 2005). These analyses are seriously handicapped by the fact that in many
cases the (archaeological) context of the Aegyptiaca is unknown or not sufficiently taken
into account.
The goddess Isis has always been, directly or indirectly, central to the study of Egyptian
artefacts found in the Roman world. As a result many things Egyptian were automatically
associated with Isis (Atlas de la diffusion des cultes isiaques; RICIS; Bricault 2004).
Critical discussions of this paradigm (Takács 1995; Versluys 2002; Elsner 2006) have
shown, however, that earlier studies generally tend to isolate the religious aspect. These
emphasize that Isis has to be studied as part of a much broader, cultural process of
interaction. The aprioristic religious interpretation dominating the study of Egyptian
material culture in the Roman world has been challenged and Aegyptiaca are now also
studied as part of different frameworks of interpretation such as, for instance, Augustan
imperial ideology (Versluys 2002; Vout 2003; Beck et. al. 2005; Nile into Tiber).
Research on Roman written sources on Egypt and Egyptians shows similar traits. There
has been a lot of scholarly attention for particular texts that deal with Isis (like Apuleius’
Metamorphoses) but there exists no integrated approach or synthesis. There have been
some attempts to challenge the religious interpretation here as well and to consider, for
instance, the use Egypt in Roman written sources as intellectual display (Egelhaaf-Gaiser
2000). It is striking that provisional hypotheses on the nature of the Roman literary
discourse on Egypt so far suggest the existence of an almost exclusively negative
perception (Versluys 2002, Ch. V). In the imperial period ever again Roman written
sources mention the same stereotypes, like Cleopatra ―female and Oriental opponent to
Roman power―, the Egyptian worship of animals and erotic aspects of the cult of Isis. At
the same time, however, Roman society actively uses aspects from Egypt and its
civilisation in material culture.
The last decade has seen several important studies on the meaning of ‘things Egyptian’ in
Roman material culture and written sources that have suggested alternative
understandings beyond Isis (see Versluys 2007 for an overview). This is therefore the
right moment to start a new project with the challenge to integrate and expand all these
earlier results and knowledge.
The methodology and approach that have been developed to do so, are innovative and
original: The current project will highlight the central role of the process of Roman
cultural innovation, will evaluate the appropriation of Egyptian elements in relation to the
incorporation of other cultures and styles and will also combine and integrate the use of
‘things Egyptian’ in material culture and in written sources.
An inherent pluralism perspective
Considering these challenges this project will re-evaluate the question of Roman cultural
innovation, focussing on Egyptian culture with an ‘inherent pluralism’ perspective.
Inherent pluralism can be defined as ‘the strategy of emulation of other sets of visual
styles, forms or iconographies as engine for cultural change and the emergence of new
cultural forms’ (cf. Gazda 2002; Elsner 2006; Marvin 2008).
This perspective is likely to provide new horizons as it has the potential to transcend and
dissolve the traditional categories that are most often postulated to understand ‘foreign’
influences. In case of Egypt in the Roman world, dichotomies have been created between
Egyptian and egyptianising; between Pharaonica, Isiaca and Nilotica; between fashion
and exotic Otherness; etc. The inherent pluralism perspective puts the process of Roman
cultural innovation central; thus proposing a very different direction for finding answers
where the traditional dichotomies might lose their relevance.
My working hypothesis is that Egyptian influences on the Roman world should be studied
with a ‘reception studies’ paradigm: not the original meaning of the Aegyptiaca would be
primarily important, but their functioning in a new context (see Swetnam-Burland 2007;
Parker 2007). Hence, in the study of Egyptian influences in the Roman world not ‘Egypt’
should be central but the system of Roman cultural innovation. Using an inherent
pluralism perspective will see to it that the challenges of my research line mentioned
above will be properly dealt with. Thinking in this concept will put contextual analyses
central. Moreover, it will allow for a comparative understanding of archaeological and
written sources and of relations to other appropriated elements.
Research question
The main research question focuses on the relation between archaeological data and
literary-historical sources and will investigate why and how Egyptian elements were
selected and used, and how they functioned in the Roman system of cultural innovation.
Through a comparison with the Roman appropriation of other ‘foreign’ elements, this
system as a whole will subsequently be analysed.
Methodology and approach
The chosen methodology combines three interconnected approaches involving
archaeological, archaeometric and literary-historical research.
The archaeological research studies the function of Egyptian material culture in Roman
private contexts. Contextual analysis of Aegyptiaca is needed to chart and analyse their
use. While a lot of work has been done on Egyptian elements in the public sphere; the
private domain is under explored.
The archaeometric research studies the provenance of Aegyptiaca from the Roman world
on the basis of a selected case-study: Rome. Archaeometric provenance determination of
Aegyptiaca will provide new evidence to evaluate the Egyptian-egyptianising dichotomy.
It is needed to elucidate the Roman selection criteria.
The literary-historical research is needed to chart and analyse the use of ‘things Egyptian’
in Roman written sources. On the basis of a representative overview it will analyse how
Egypt is used in the Roman literary discourse.
These three approaches to the subject will culminate in an overarching synthesis, tying
together the results of the three different analyses. Through a comparison of this
synthesis on ‘Egypt in the Roman world’ with the Roman appropriation of other ‘foreign’
influences (most notably Greek) it will provide a re-evaluation of the debate on Roman
cultural innovation and the Roman acceptation, rejection and use of foreign influences in
general.
Structure of the project
The three approaches to the research question will be executed by three PhD students
and result in three monographs on specific subjects: 1 archaeological (promotor Prof. J.L.
Binliff, Classical Archaeology), 1 archaeometric (promotor Prof. H. van der Plicht,
Archaeological Sciences) and 1 literary-historical (promotor Prof. I Sluiter, Classics); see
below. This research as a whole will stimulate and add significantly to the research and
overarching synthesis written by the applicant. At the same time the synthesising
research will strengthen the coherence between the three specific subjects and add to
them. My research (‘Appropriating Egypt: A study in Roman cultural innovation’) will first
give a novel synthesis on ‘Egypt in the Roman world’ from an inherent pluralism
perspective. It will, secondly, through a comparison with the Roman appropriation of
other ‘foreign’ influences (most notably Greek) enable a re-evaluation of the debate on
Roman cultural innovation and the Roman acceptation, rejection and use of foreign
influences in general.
The current project will, with regard to Egypt in the Roman world, not be able to allow for
all the gaps still existing in the material and written record. Three subjects have been
carefully selected.
Subject 1 (archaeological): The function of Egyptian material culture in Roman private
contexts: the Aegyptiaca of Pompeii.
Subject 2 (archaeometric): Provenance determination of Aegyptiaca from Rome and the
Roman world.
Subject 3 (literary-historical): Imagining Egypt: the Roman literary discourse on the land
of the Nile.
In themselves they all are important lacunae for the field. The links between them are
strong as the subjects are woven together through a central and overarching research
question: Which elements of Egypt are selected and, in combination with an analysis of
the context, why?
Archaeological research
The function of Egyptian material culture in Roman private contexts: the Aegyptiaca of
Pompeii (PhD 1)
Pompeii is the key-site to study the functioning of Roman cultural pluralism and the role
of Aegyptiaca in Roman private contexts. However, an overview of the available sources
dates from 1964 and is focussed on cultic aspects alone (Tran tam Tinh 1964). In the last
decades a lot of (new) material has been (re)published. A recent Naples exhibition
(Egittomania) again added unknown material without, however, providing contextual
analysis. Roman houses have been extensively researched; traditionally with a focus on
architecture and architectural decoration and without sufficient attention for other
aspects. The last decade has seen important new publications on mainly Pompeian
houses, looking for a more integrated interpretation of houses and all aspects of their
decoration, use and meaning. Household archaeology (Allison 1999; 2004; also Gazda
1991) is part of this development. So far, however, this approach has barely included
Aegyptiaca. This research will structure the existing data from Pompeii and subsequently
study the use of Aegyptiaca in the private context of the house. The practical work
consists of a critical re-evaluation and structuring of the published data and,
subsequently, a selection of adequate case studies where theories on Roman houses and
household archaeology will be applied to the specific data set of 1 house (including site
study). A comparison with the (abundant) use of Greek elements in Roman houses is
especially appropriate here.
Archaeometric research
Provenance determination of Aegyptiaca from Rome and the Roman world (PhD 2)
The city of Rome has preserved a large amount of Aegyptiaca, most of them made out of
stone. Among this material are the obelisks that adorned the imperial city, as well as the
sphinxes, Egyptian lions and the statues for the Egyptian gods decorating streets,
houses, parks and temples. This (archaeometric) research will provide a database with
new evidence to establish the provenance of these Aegyptiaca and to elucidate the
reasons for their selection.
The database will add new and significant information to the knowledge about the
provenance of Aegyptiaca we possess so far. Of some pieces the provenance is already
known. In other cases it is clear that petrologic analysis alone says not everything about
provenance. It has even been suggested that in a period when there was a
Mediterranean trade in coloured marble, the actual provenance of the stone says little
about neither sculptor nor client. This discussion—fundamental for testing the EgyptianEgyptianising dichotomy characterising large parts of the field—can only be brought
further by new input of hard data. The archaeometric provenance determination will
provide this. In a further analysis of Roman selection criteria for ‘things Egyptian’, this
new input will be compared to and integrated with existing theories, with the help of
stylistic analysis and a study of the Egyptological background.
Selecting Rome as the principal case study has intrinsic as well as practical reasons.
Rome has preserved the largest and most diverse quantity of Aegyptiaca in the Roman
Empire. These are available for sampling in several collections (Museo Baracco, Musei
Capitolini, Musei Vaticani). Close contacts with the curators of these museums have
shown a strong commitment from their side to participate in this project. Written
approvals are in the process of being obtained. Occasionally also Aegyptiaca from other
contexts will be analyzed to answer specific questions with regard to the private contexts
studied by the archaeological research.
A sample of about 80-100 objects with known context from the most current raw
materials will be selected: marble, limestone, basalt and granite. This database will be
studied through mineralogical and geochemical (isotope) analysis (for comparable
provenance determination studies see Degryse et. al. 2003; De Vito et. al. 2004;
Polikreti et. al. 2004). These techniques require a minimal amount of sampled material.
For provenance determination existing databases of Egyptian and Italian quarries will be
used (see Peacock/Maxfield 2001 and the database of professor J.A. Harrell from the
University of Toledo).
The research will be carried out in cooperation with the Center for Archaeological
Sciences (CAS), Leuven University. This center has a lot of expertise with the provenance
determination of stone from Antiquity, is a reliable partner for the Italian museums and is
currently involved in the characterization and site survey of Egyptian quarries.
Literary-historical research
Imagining Egypt: the Roman literary discourse on the land of the Nile (PhD 3)
Egypt has always loomed large in Greek and Roman imagination. Where the role of Egypt
in Greek literature and other cultural domains has been extensively studied (Froidefond
1971; Assmann 2000; Vasunia 2001), there exists no overview and interpretation of
Roman written sources on Egypt. In imagining Egypt in the literary discourse, the
Romans faced a dilemma. The cultural heritage and prestige of the country and the
Ptolemaic dynasty were undeniable; but its civilisation was now subject to Rome. As with
Greece and Greek civilisation we may thus expect the Roman attitude towards Egypt to
be a balancing act of distancing and including. What makes the Egyptian case even more
interesting is the important role the last Egyptian pharaoh, Cleopatra, played in Roman
history.
A large part of the textual material itself is familiar and some individual texts and/or
authors are much discussed. This research is original though, because it will provide an
overall interpretation of the Roman literary discourse on the land of the Nile that will,
moreover, be placed against the background of two important recent debates. Firstly, the
view adopted by this proposal of the Roman world as a cosmopolitan system of inherent
pluralism. Secondly, the view of Roman literary texts as imperialistic discourse (e.g.
Murphy 2004). Through its specific conclusions on the Roman imagination of other
(conquered) cultures, this part of the research will contribute to those general
discussions as well. After a compilation and exploration of the overview of source
material and an investigation of relevant interpretative concepts, a selection of specific
authors or texts will be made that enable an in-depth study of specific research
questions. This part of the research will be carried out in co-operation with the Faculty of
Arts, Leiden University.
Bibliography
P.M. Allison (ed.), The archaeology of household activities (London 1999)
P. M. Allison, Pompeian households: an analysis of material culture (LA 2004)
A. Appadurai, Fear of small numbers. An essay on the geography of anger (Durham
2006)
Atlas de la diffusion des cultes isiaques = L. Bricault (ed.), Atlas de la diffusion des cultes
isiaques (Paris 2001)
J. Assmann, Weisheit und Mysterium. Das Bild der Griechen von Ägypten (München
2000)
W. Ball, Rome in the East. The transformation of an Empire (London 2000)
H. Beck, P.C. Bol, M. Bückling (eds.), Ägypten-Griechenland-Rom. Abwehr und
Berührung (Berlin 2005)
U. Beck, Der kosmopolitische Blick oder: Krieg ist Frieden (Frankfurt aM 2004)
L. Bricault, La diffusion isiaque : une esquisse, Städel Jahrbuch NF 19 (2004) 548-556
P. Degryse, P. Muchez, L. Loots, L. Vandeput, M. Waelkens, The building stones of
Roman Sagalassos (SW Turkey) : Facies analysis and provenance, Facies 48 (1) 9-22
C. De Vito, V. Ferrini, S. Mignardi, L. Piccardi, R. Tuteri, Mineralogical-petrographic and
geochemical study to identify the provenance of limestone from two archaeological sites
in the Sulmona Area (L’Aquila, Italy), Journal of Archaeological Science 31 (2004) 13831394
C. Edwards & G. Woolf (eds.), Rome the cosmopolis (Cambridge 2003)
U. Egelhaaf-Gaiser, Kulträume im römischen Alltag. Das Isisbuch des Apuleius und der
Ort der Religion im kaiserzeitlichen Rom (Stuttgart 2000)
Egittomania = S. De Caro (ed.), Egittomania. Iside e il mistero (exhibition catalogue,
Napoli 2006)
J. Elsner, Classicism in Roman art, in: Porter 2006, 270-297
C. Froidefond, Le mirage égyptien dans la littérature grecque d'Homère à Aristote (Paris
1971)
E.K. Gazda (ed.), Roman art in the private sphere: new perspectives on the architecture
and décor of the domus, villa and insula (Ann Arbor 1991)
E. Gazda (ed.), The ancient art of Emulation (Cambridge 2002)
C. Gosden, Archaeology and colonialism. Cultural contact from 5000 BC to the present
(Cambridge 2004)
E.S. Gruen, Cultural borrowings and ethnic appropriations in Antiquity (Stuttgart 2005)
J.M. Hall, Hellenicity. Between ethnicity and culture (Chicago 2002)
R. Hingley, Globalizing Roman culture. Unity, diversity and empire (Londen 2005)
T. Hölscher, Römische Bildsprache als semantisches System (Heidelberg 1987)
T. Hölscher, Greek styles and Greek art in Augustan Rome: issues of the present versus
records of the past, in: Porter 2006, 237-259
R. MacMullan, Romanization in the time of Augustus (New Haven 2000)
M. Malaise, Inventaire préliminaire des documents égyptiens découverts en Italie (Leiden
1972)
M. Malaise, Pour une terminologie et une analyse des cultes isiaques (Bruxelles 2005)
M. Marvin, The language of the Muses: the dialogue between Greek and Roman sculpture
(LA 2008)
J. McKenzie, The architecture of Alexandria and Egypt, 300 BC – AD 700 (London 2007)
T. Murphy, Pliny the Elder's Natural History: The Empire in the Encyclopedia (Oxford
2004)
Nile into Tiber = L. Bricault, M.J. Versluys & P.G.P. Meyboom, Nile into Tiber. Egypt in the
Roman world. Proceedings of the IIIrd international conference of Isis studies, Leiden,
May 11-14 2005 (Leiden 2007)
G. Parker, Obelisks still in exile: monuments made to measure?, in: Nile into Tiber, 209222
D. Peacock, V. Maxfield, The Roman imperial porphyry quarries. Survey and excavation
at Mons Porphyrites 1994-1998 (2001)
K. Polikreti, Y. Maniatis, Y. Bassiakos, N. Kourou, V. Karageorghis, Provenance of
archaeological limestone with EPR spectroscopy : the case of the Cypriote type
statuettes, Journal of Archaeological Science 31 (2004) 1015-1028
J.I. Porter (ed.), Classical Pasts. The classical traditions of Greece and Rome (Princeton
2006)
J. F. Quack, Zum ägyptischen Ritual im Iseum Campense in Rom, in: C. MetznerNebelsick (ed.), Rituale in der Vorgeschichte, Antike und Gegenwart. Interdisziplinäre
Tagung, Berlin 2002 (2003) 57-66
T. Rajak, The Jewish dialogue with Greece and Rome. Studies in cultural and social
interaction (2002)
RICIS = L. Bricault, Recueil des Inscriptions Concernant les cultes IsiaqueS (Paris 2005)
A. Roullet, The Egyptian and egyptianising monuments of imperial Rome (Leiden 1972)
G.J. Stein (ed.), The archaeology of colonial encounters. Comparative perspectives
(Oxford 2005)
M. Swetnam-Burland, Egyptian objects, Roman contexts: a taste for Aegyptiaca in Italy,
in: Nile into Tiber, 113-136
S. A. Takács, Isis and Sarapis in the Roman World (Leiden 1995)
V. Tran tam Tinh, Essai sur le culte d’Isis à Pompéi (Paris 1964)
P. Vasunia, The gift of the Nile. Hellenising Egypt from Aeschylus to Alexander (NY 2001)
Versluys 2002 = M.J. Versluys, Aegyptiaca Romana. Nilotic Scenes and the Roman Views
of Egypt (Leiden 2002)
Versluys 2007 = M.J. Versluys, Aegyptiaca Romana. The widening debate, in: Nile into
Tiber, 1-14
Versluys 2008 = M.J. Versluys, Exploring identities in the Phoenician, Hellenistic and
Roman East. A review article, Bibliotheca Orientalis 65 (2008) 342-356
C. Vout, Embracing Egypt, in: Edwards/Woolf 2003, 177-202
A. Wallace-Hadrill, To be Roman, go Greek: thoughts on hellenization at Rome, in: M.
Austin, J. Harries & C. Smith (eds.), Modus operandi. Essays in honour of Geoffrey
Rickman (London 1998) 79-92
A. Wallace-Hadrill, Rome’s Cultural revolution (Cambridge 2008)
G. Woolf, Becoming Roman. The origins of provincial civilization in Gaul (Cambridge
1998)